Read More

With all the new housing developments that are taking place in Wokingham in the near future, has anyone at the council undertaken a cost analysis on the amount of extra revenue that will be generated from council tax from these new builds over the next 10 years and could not those extra monies be used to save the last central green space in its entirety?

Answer

The Council Tax income on all new properties is factored into our Long Term Financial Forecasts.

Unfortunately this additional income is only a small part of our financial picture. Our Government grant is falling by approximately £3m to £4m per annum, we face unavoidable statutory growth pressures such as Adult Social Care that generates additional spending pressures of over £2m year on year and we face inflationary pressures (e.g. energy) if almost £2m per annum.

In addition we have significant demands for investment in our community, particularly the infrastructure requirement of the new SDL’s. It is important we also maximise our capital income in the context of minimising our net investment in the Town Centre Regeneration and maximise our ability to fund the needed investment in our community.

Trevor Sleet

Question

There used to be 6 public tennis courts on Elms Field, by removing them Wokingham Borough Council have reduced the total number across the Borough to 14.

Do you think that by building on Elms Field the Council are walking away from the Borough's contribution to the Olympic legacy?

Answer

There are currently 4 tennis courts at Elms Field not the 6 as mentioned in your question.

These will no longer be provided on the Elms field site but S106 contributions from the scheme will be used to mitigate this loss and will fully fund the provision of 3 new higher specification, tennis courts on the Cantley Park site.

Although there will be a reduction of one court overall the inclusion of floodlighting on the new courts will allow for much longer hours of use by the community than was possible at Elms Field.

The Council is fully committed to securing Wokingham’s Olympic legacy and the recently adopted Open Space, Sports and Leisure strategy continues to build upon this by seeing the creation of many new opportunities for sport and leisure throughout the borough.

Amanda Kirby

Question

'Given the refusal to grant tree preservation orders and pay usual developer social housing contributions, as wdc are the landowner, developer and applying for the planning permission to their own planning authority what guarantees can the council make that this is an independently verified and just process for developing our town's essential green space and how do they guarantee the viability of these plans are worth the risk to residents both financially and socially?'

Answer

The requirement for regeneration and growth within Wokingham Town Centre has been carefully established through Planning Policy in the Core Strategy. This policy document was subject to consultation and assessment at Inquiry by an independent Planning Inspector. The redevelopment of the Town Centre has also been established by the Town Centre Masterplan SPD which was also subject to public consultation.

The proposed redevelopment of the Town Centre has been adopted in policy as the risk of doing nothing to the town has a significant detrimental social and economic impact for Wokingham as it forms part of the infrastructure needs of a growing and socially changing population. Failure to deliver it will impact upon the residents of the town as it will continue to decline and fail to meet their needs

Wokingham Borough Council has a policy not to place Tree Protection Orders (TPOs) on trees on its own land and this is common practice for council’s nationally.

TPOs are usually placed on trees where the Council becomes aware of a threat to trees on privately owned sites such as when the site is identified for development.

This ensures that the trees are retained to allow them to be considered through any planning application process.

In this case, the trees on Elms Field will be fully assessed as part of the planning application. The existence of a TPO does not prevent the trees being removed if planning permission is granted for this.

Before the planning application for the Town Centre was submitted, a full viability assessment was undertaken.

This identified the scheme is unable to sustain affordable housing as well as the delivery of essential infrastructure such as improvements to the highway network and improvements to the town centre as a whole.

Legally, the Council must make planning applications in the same way as any other person and they must follow the same procedures as would apply to applications made by anyone else.

The Council assesses its own applications acting in the regulatory capacity as the Local Planning Authority. These must be independently assessed against planning policy and all other material planning considerations that are set out by legislation and guidance.

While local authorities may grant themselves planning permission for their own development this is subject to several important safeguards.

In particular the proposals must be advertised and decided in public by a committee, members of which are subject to a Code of Conduct to ensure that that application is judged on its own merits and that planning decisions are taken openly, impartially, with sound judgement and for justifiable reasons.

Although not assessed as part of the planning application process the Council’s approach to managing the scheme has also been designed with the intent of de-risking their investment and they have imposed several conditions on themselves to ensure the scheme is financially viable, self-supporting and does not become a burden on the tax payer.

Peter Must

Question

For over a year now, we have been told that the name of the retailer which would occupy the proposed food store on Elms Field was imminent. Is it not now time to acknowledge that this has become a hugely difficult concept to sell to retailers, who are pulling back from new large stores in favour of smaller express units and online shopping, and that actually leaving this prime area of open space undeveloped would better represent our market town as a gateway to those approaching it from the south?

Answer

The proposals for Elms Field are based upon a need for retail floorspace infrastructure to support local growth and as such doing nothing on this site and leaving the town to decline further would mean we were failing to meet our resident’s needs, both existing and future.

Delays in signing contracts have not been due to any lack of interest from tenants and negotiations with the provider are progressing well to our revised timetables.

Conversations with the market and with our Lettings Agents Strutt and Parker have shown great interest in a regenerated Wokingham as a location and we are confident that we will be able to secure the right tenants for our properties, both the larger anchor units and the smaller niche stores.

The private development scheme for the old Fireserve building on the corner of Peach Street and Cross Street, and the recent rumour that Sports Direct are taking on the old Blockbuster unit again shows that interest in the town remains strong as a location for investment and trade. The reason many retailers are not coming to town at the moment is that they cannot find suitable units and this is something that the regeneration seeks to address.

Our proposals have been produced to ensure that a proportion of the necessary retail growth can occur in Wokingham; that we creating the right gateways to the town and that we are creating the right, overall town centre experience, to differentiate ourselves from larger neighbours like Reading and Bracknell. We are doing this by strengthening our niche, independent and Market offer which we know is crucial to getting people back into Wokingham town centre.

Clive Jones

Question

A new Open Space, Sports and Recreation Strategy was adopted at the Executive meeting on 28th November. The report stated that as a result of new housing development in the Strategic Development Locations there will be a need for an extra 48 hectares of parks, gardens and amenity greenspace. In this context, how do you justify removing green space at Elms Field?

Answer

The Open Space, Sports and Recreation Strategy will require the SDL development to deliver 48 hectares of parks, gardens and amenity greenspace to serve those new communities

As it is within the town centre and at some distance from the proposed SDL developments Elms Field is not considered a suitable location to adequately serve these new communities.

All SDL’s will include new open space provision and the Council has already started work on delivering over 260 hectares of new parks, open spaces, play areas, sports pitches and SANGs across the borough. This will be available to new and existing residents alike.

The regeneration will also provide for new tennis Courts at Cantley Park and a brand new much improved children’s play area. In addition improvements in quality of the retained amenity greenspace at Elms Field site will mitigate for the reduction in the overall size of the amenity greenspace on the site.

Marc Maynard

Question

We understand that the Council will make a loss on the development of Peach Place and that the Council have maintained that the regeneration plans therefore hinge on the development of Elms Field to cover this loss; given the council has already accounted for, and paid, 10M for Peach Place, the fact that the regeneration plans are due to make an estimated profit of 20M, plus the considerable cash reserves the council has of some 60M, why are 157 dwellings on Elms Field, resulting in further loss of many mature trees and further impact on the green space, required to fund the regeneration?

Answer

The scheme at Elms Field is being developed, not to pay for the development of Peach Place, but because it is a critical part of the infrastructure requirements to support our growing town. Regardless of whether Peach Place was redeveloped we would still be proceeding with our plans for Elms Field.

It’s common knowledge that Peach Place is non-viable as a stand along site.

The original private scheme for the site proposed 142 residential units on the same red lined site that we are using and still could not get the scheme to move forward.

To us at the Council, 142 homes at this site, added to the private proposals of between 259 and 300 homes at the Elms Field site was too much overdevelopment for the town.

It’s another reason that we wanted to step in to take over both schemes and ensure the level of development was right for Wokingham rather than the developer.

We feel that our 157 residential units across both sites is a far more appropriate level than the proposed 401-442 that private development would have seen built on the same land.

As you suggest the Council could have made the decision to fund the entire scheme from our reserves but we stand by our decision to ensure that this project remains self-funding and does not become a burden on the local tax payer.

If we were to use up all the reserves then the Council would not be in a position to fund other critical and non-profit making, projects within the borough. This would have a detrimental impact on our residents and communities and such a decision would be irresponsible of us.

Knowing that the necessary infrastructure development at Elms must be delivered we feel the Council approach of tackling these as a single cross funding project is the right one and it has helped us create a balanced scheme with many benefits for our local residents.

We can ensure the scheme aligns closely with the Town Centre Masterplan and other planning guidance

We can deliver the appropriate level of development without being constrained by the need to maximise profit for shareholders.

We can create a viable scheme which funds itself, does not become a burden on tax payers and allows local spend to benefit all residents with residual profits coming back to the Council to fund other projects and services within the borough

We can place as much importance on ‘social capital’ as the financial pound when making decisions over profit and invest more back into non-profit elements of the scheme

We can ensure that what is developed is of the highest quality, appropriate for the town and that corners are not cut to increase profit at the risk of quality.

As owners of both sites we can make decisions on lettings to ensure the two developments work together rather than being competing developments

We can ensure that selection of tenants is carried out with local aspirations to become a town which stands out for the quality and mix of independent and niche retailers in mind

We can support the extension of the Market offer and create more opportunities for events to make our town stand out as the best community location.

For the Council it is not a case of whether this growth will happen or not within the town centre, as infrastructure delivery is necessary to support all the local development going on in the borough. For us it was a decision around who was best placed to oversee delivery and benefit from the scheme and we feel our decision to deliver it ourselves using the route we have chosen is the best possible solution for Wokingham.

John Ibbotson

Question

Why do we have to have another supermarket, hotel and more homes in place of playing fields. Although the government have requested more houses to be built it was not at the expense of playing fields.

Answer

Wokingham is facing significant housing growth in the years to 2026, including approximately 4000 homes on the edge of the town.

The delivery of housing on this scale must be supported by the provision of infrastructure to ensure that development is sustainable and provides the services required by existing and new residents.

The new supermarket will help to meet the retail needs of future residents within the town, which cannot be met by existing supermarket provision and the hotel will contribute to the economic development of Wokingham town as it grows to address future needs.

Government policy (the National Planning Policy Framework) allows for the development of areas of green space/playing fields if the loss of green space resulting from the proposed development would be replaced by equivalent or better provision in terms of quantity and quality in a suitable location. The development proposals for Elms Field provide a high quality green space in the centre of the town which will meet the needs of both current and future residents. In addition the development is contributing financially to the provision of additional tennis courts at Cantley.

Fiona Campbell-White

Question

How much money does the Council anticipate raising from selling off a section of Elms Field for houses? (NB I am only asking about the section of Elms Field that is being sold off for houses NOT The Paddocks Car Park.)

Answer

The financial details in regards to the joint venture agreement between Wilson Bowden, David Wilson Homes and the Council are deemed commercially sensitive and cannot be shared at the current time.

This agreement is still very much a living document and will be used actively as we move forward with a range of detailed transactions such as the appointment of the build contractors and the final sale negotiations to owners

Clare Odds

Question

In view of Wokingham Borough Council's responsibility for the Health and Wellbeing of its community and the high level of depression and anxiety prevalent in the Borough, is it not essential to maintain Elms Field as an open area - no housing, no hotel and no supermarket so that the community can continue to relax and enjoy the open space, of which there is so little in the centre of Wokingham?

Answer

The Council recognises the importance of the health and wellbeing of our residents. This is why a large amount of open space will remain at Elms Field with our plans to create a high quality town park.

Despite its location the existing space is not highly used apart from the play area and the annual events, both of which will be provided for within the regeneration proposals, with a much better play area and a specially designed and serviced events space for the town.

The improved park will be much more attractive and accessible to a wider range of people than currently use it, including things such as more trees, attractive areas of planting and more seating for relaxation and enjoyment of the space.

Our proposals respond directly to the kinds of facilities local people told us they wanted to see in a park at our public consultations.

In addition to the improved facilities which will be available at Elms Field the Council is also committed to making sure that all our residents have access to high quality open spaces.

We have already started on delivering over 160 hectares of new natural green spaces within the borough, including several parks in Wokingham itself. All of this will help us support a healthier and happier population for Wokingham

David Tinker

Question

The council has always said it will not build the retail units on Elms Field unless it can pre-let them.

However, there is nothing to stop the construction of the residential units on Elms Field going ahead immediately if planning permission is granted.

It is unclear what will happen if the council is ready to start construction, but no or insufficient retail units have been pre-let.

Given the increasing use of on-line shopping, for example, we could find the take-up lacking, whereby insufficient retail units get built but the residential units do.

This would mean the Paddocks car park would be destroyed with NO replacement built. The larger area of the open, green space on Elms is much reduced, but the brownfield site of Wellington house and council staff car parks, would be left untouched.

This would be total disaster. Will you guarantee that the council will NOT start work on the residential units before you know with absolute certainty that this food store (occupants as yet unidentified) and other retail units WILL be built on the east side of Elms Field?

Answer

We agree that there is nothing legally obliging us to deliver every element of the scheme and should we receive planning approval we would be in a position to deliver some elements whilst ignoring others, but please be reassured that this is not our intent.

We knew from our conversations over the years with the private developers interested in developing the site that this ‘cherry picking’ of more profitable elements was a real possibility. This was especially apparent with the need to get an appropriate scheme for Peach Place which was never going to be financially viable on its own without chronic overdevelopment.

The risk of these private developer’s only part delivering the scheme was identified early on and formed part of the supporting case when the decision was made by the Council to proceed with ownership, management and delivery of the scheme ourselves.

If this scheme was purely about money making then perhaps the Council might have been tempted to do the same thing ourselves.

However this scheme is not about the money but about the need to deliver the right retail and leisure for our growing town.

The Council has a duty to ensure the necessary infrastructure is in place over the coming years, and without it Wokingham will continue to decline, benefiting neither the residents nor the Council.

In regards to the risk of not letting our commercial units, we know from our conversations with the market and our lettings agents, that securing sufficient interest in the scheme to meet our self-imposed pre-let condition is unlikely to be a problem.

There is great interest in coming to Wokingham but there simply are not the units to accommodate the right quality of retailers to the town

Because of the nature of our design, much of the supporting commercial work needs to be done to deliver the housing anyway so the risk of delivering one without the other is unlikely.

Our application commits us to supporting the Council’s Car Parking Strategy; so again, it’s unlikely we could remove the car park without securing the appropriate replacement spaces elsewhere.

However, within the development agreement between WBC, Wilson Bowden and David Wilson Homes, the pre-let condition requiring the foodstore and hotel to be let prior to starting construction relates to construction of the whole and therefore includes the residential units at Elms Field.

Through the planning permission the Local Planning Authority can also set conditions relating to the phasing of delivery and these will be decided upon through the application process.

Roger Kirby

Question

As the justification for another supermarket adjacent to the town centre, to supplement the existing Waitrose store, is based on the anticipated increase in population of the town envisaged as a result of the large number of houses being built on the periphery of Wokingham, why not sanction any new supermarket nearer to those new houses and maintain green space in the centre of town as it is being lost at the edges?

Answer

The Nathaniel Lichfield Study identifies the need for additional food retail floorspace to support the local growth set out in the Core Strategy.

It has been asked as to why we don’t locate the foodstore out of town.

The answer to this is that we know town and high streets up and down the country are in decline and one of the key reasons for this is the increase in out of town retail parks which has drawn footfall out of our towns.

So, if we truly want to regenerate our town, it is imperative that the foodstore be included within the town to bring footfall back into the town and help support other retailers

Provision of another foodstore out of town would compound the issues and draw more people away from the town centre thus speeding up the current decline of our high street.

In regards to the loss of green space at the edges of town the Council has embarked upon a programme which will see the creation of over 160 hectares of new natural green spaces which will available for local residents to enjoy.

This includes several new parks and open spaces around Wokingham itself so the total amount of open space available to residents will substantially increase, not decrease in the coming years.

Peter Odds

Question

Bearing in mind the thousands of dwellings being built across in Wokingham town centre and the Borough, why is it necessary to build a further 157 houses directly on Elms Field and the Paddock car park?

Answer

The proposals being put forward for regeneration are directly in line with the Town Centre Masterplan Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) which was adopted following public consultation in June 2010.

The Masterplan identifies this area for a mixed use scheme which includes commercial and residential development.

There are over 13,000 new homes being delivered within the borough to 2026.The majority of these homes (approximately 10,000) are within the four Strategic Development Locations developments. The remaining 3000 homes are to be delivered on sites across the Borough, including with Wokingham town centre, and are allocated for housing within the Council’s Managing Development Delivery Plan (MDD). The MDD Plan includes an allocation for residential uses at Elms Field.

Town Centres are an ideal location for the delivery of these remaining homes as they offer a sustainable way of living and are surrounded by the facilities that residents need.

In addition bringing people back to live in town centres helps creating additional footfall and increased safety of spaces helping make the town centre more viable in the long term.

Wilson Bowden has been appointed as the Development Managers for the scheme whilst David Wilson Homes are the Council’s Joint Venture Partners for residential elements only. Although both part of the Barratt group these are very different roles.

The Council entered this agreement after several years of a competitive dialogue process to identify the best partners to move forward and believe we have selected the correct team for this project. Indeed through this process the Council could have chosen to reject David Wilson Homes as the residential partner and remained with Wilson Bowden on the commercial side only, however we chose to enter the agreement with them because of the strength of the overall scheme they were proposing for both the commercial and residential elements and the quality of their experience and skills.

S tan Hetherington

Question

“Wokingham Borough Council Approved the Wokingham Town Centre Masterplan SPD in June 2010 which established the Council’s design, transport, public realm, urban design, land use and sustainability requirements for the Town Centre for the period up to 2026, in particular it set out the size of the new Town Park.

Does that decision by the Council make this meeting at best 3 years late and at worst a waste of time?.”

Answer

The Council welcomes opportunities, such as this meeting and the recent exhibitions in the Market Place, to be able to respond to public comments and concerns on the scheme proposals.

As highlighted by Mr. Hetherington, the adopted Town Centre Masterplan Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) establishes the principles for the development of Wokingham town centre up to 2026. The SPD was developed to be in line with the Wokingham Core Strategy (adopted in 2009) which identifies the opportunities for the growth and renaissance of Wokingham town centre.

The SPD identifies the opportunity for the development of the Elms Field area for retail, residential uses, enhanced open space and community and cultural facilities.

This opportunity was identified through significant public consultation and input from local residents and businesses during the preparation of the SPD in 2009/10.

In particular the planning for real workshop, the formal and informal consultations stages with their associated public exhibitions which were held to gather public opinion and to inform the content of the plan.

As required by planning law, the applications have been prepared in accordance with the principles for development established in the Core Strategy and the SPD and therefore are in line with the adopted planning policy for the town centre.

Whilst the principles for development are established within the Core Strategy and SPD, the Council welcomes further comments on the specific proposals within the planning application.

However, what I would add is that contrary to some comment we have undergone an enormous amount of consultation with members of the public and stakeholders both for the planning policies and the regeneration scheme

Christopher O’Donnell

Question

The Distressed Retail Property Taskforce is the latest organisation to call for an overhaul of Britain's high streets. Their most recent report clearly recognises that in the last few years, high street retailers have battled against cheaper online competition and a fall in consumer confidence amid rising pressure on household income. They have reported that town centre shops closed at a rate of 18 a day in the first half of this year (figures by the Local Data Company)

The taskforce, set up following the Portas review into the future of high streets, suggests that an ‘unprecedented’ scale of change and remodelling is required in our town centres. It calls for greater use of CPOs. This was being stated in the context of the taskforce Chair’s statement, in the report, that high streets had changed dramatically in the past five years, due to the recession and the increased use of online shopping. There were now too many shops.

I repeat – there are too many shops. Will it become a reality that there will be more empty shops in Peach Street and that so many of the existing 1960s buildings will continue to be ugly and eventually abandoned or derelict. Why can’t we create the situation where the existing retail footprint is better used?

Answer

There has been a huge amount of research and reports on the future of the high street which have come out in the past few years and these very much support and promote the approach being taken by the Council.

The Distressed Town Centres research that you single out highlights a range of things as critical for survival of town centres. Things such as

Recognising the importance of the Town centre as an essential part of national infrastructure and ensuring the planning strategy is there to support it

Reducing multiple land ownerships for increased control and improved management

Encouraging Local Authorities to invest their own money in commercial regeneration schemes

Encouraging alternative uses for empty shops and offices.

We are glad that they listed things like these as they are exactly the things that the Council is already doing in the town centre, through things such as the Core Strategy and the adopted Masterplan Planning policies, and especially through the Town Centre Regeneration project which picks up on every point mentioned above.

The report does identify that many town centres suffer from too many shops and it is evident in many town centres where shops remain empty and tenants cannot be found for them. However this is not the situation in Wokingham where our discussion with potential tenants and our lettings agent Strutt and Parker shows that interest in the town remains high.

Wokingham has an incredibly low vacancy rate of less than 3% against a national average of over 14%. We only have a handful of empty shops and many of the existing units that are ‘vacant’ remain so for specific reasons, such as those which are part of buildings due to be redeveloped

Although many retailers are interested in coming to the town centre they cannot as suitable units are not available for them. Little can be done to adapt many of our existing units as they are very much part of the historic fabric of Wokingham and, in several cases, are listed buildings, and limited changes can occur.

This is why we are also demolishing the poor 1960’s building at Peach Place so we can replace it with improved units which meet modern retailing needs and are also designed with greater flexibility to adapt to any future changes to retailing. The same ‘future proofing’ approach has been used in the design of the units at Elms Field.

We are confident that we will find the tenants to fill our units and that our proposed mix, which aims to promote more niche and independent shopping and strengthen the market offer, will help us create a town centre which attracts more footfall and offers something different from neighbours such as Bracknell and Reading.

Rosemary O’Donnell

Question

As somebody who lives in the middle of Wokingham and needs, daily, to travel in and out of Wokingham by car, the traffic is already bad. Increasing the local population by many thousands will make matters significantly worse.

There is a very real danger that the increased pressure on Wokingham’s infrastructure will kill the very things that made Wokingham such a desirable place to live in.

I am aware of the planned estate road through the housing development alongside the London Road and the connection route from the railway station to the Reading Road.

What specific plans does the Council have to improve the local infrastructure beyond these limited measures to cope with the increased traffic?

Answer

The Council has carried out extensive traffic modelling of the Borough and town centre to determine the likely impact of the proposed development across the town.

As a consequence of this significant major road schemes are proposed around the south and north of the town.

These schemes are already coming forward as a part of the development sites already underway and the Council is committed to deliver these roads over the term of the current core strategy.

These new roads will reduce the need for through traffic to use the town centre.

In addition to this the Council continues to look at the best steps it can take to address residents’ concerns about traffic congestion.

Current initiatives include investing in new roads, an improved railway station, extending and improving park and ride, better cycling and walking facilities and improved technology to increase capacity at existing junctions.

David Roland

Question

To quote from BCIS on http://www.rics.org/uk/knowledge/bcis/

“Our data is used by consultants, and contractors to produce specific estimates for option appraisals, early cost advice, cost planning and benchmarking” This service is in the public realm and is used to give initial costing to building projects, so that different options can be considered. Why is the council claiming that there is commercial confidentiality when this is not so?

Answer

The Council are aware of the BCIS tool and it is useful for calculating costs, especially at early stages of projects when a rough costing is required to help with decision making.

However the BCIS Tool purely relates to construction costs and does not take into account any of the wider costs associated with projects like the regeneration.

These include things such as procurement, consultation, professional teams and site assembly. For the costs it does calculate, such as bricks and roof tiles, it only provides an estimated figure.

Given the level of complexity and detail involved in the Regeneration project, and the stage we are now at with the planning applications being submitted, it would not be appropriate for the Council to use a tool like this to assess the cost of regenerating the town.

With the Council funding the commercial elements of the scheme we need to ensure that decisions are made based upon the most accurate data available rather than simple estimates. As such we have appointed Faithful & Gould who are leading cost consultants to advise us on the detailed costs of delivering the scheme.

At this stage the information contained within these cost plans, along with other financial information remains commercially sensitive. There are real reasons as to why we are not in a position to release this information in detail at this current time.

It is for the very need to protect the investment being made by the Council and ensure that we get the best deal for local tax payers that leads us to withhold this information.

These plans are still very much living documents and will be used actively as we move forward with a range of detailed transactions such as the appointment of the build contractors, selection of tenants and the final land negotiations.

Should these detailed figures become public knowledge then the Council and our partners will lose ability to negotiate the best deals on the project for the very people who are concerned about these investments.

As an example if you were buying a house you would not tell the vendor your absolute upper limit but would go in with an offer below this and work up to an agreed price.

However we have made every effort to release information where we can to show the good financial benefits of this scheme for the local residents and have also been very careful to show how we are de-risking this investment through things such as the pre-let clause where we will not be building this scheme until we have secured enough guaranteed pre-let tenants to ensure the costs of the scheme can be met from scheme income rather than from taxpayers pockets.

Wayne Barron

Question

The council have said that the money generated from the sale of the land at Elms Field will be used to fund developments in other areas of the borough. What other projects will this be funding?

Answer

Throughout the scheme the Council have been determined that the regeneration proposals must be self-funding and not rely on tax payer money to pay for the scheme.

This is why the Council has put in place a pre-let condition where work will only begin when sufficient income is secured to cover the cost of the development.

Income from rents will be used to pay the borrowing costs which fund the development and the residual income above this will be returned to the Council to fund other schemes and services. At this stage no decisions have been made as to what will be done with such income although the scope is wide and it is hoped that it will help deliver benefits across the borough as well as in Wokingham town.

Pressure has been placed on existing Council budgets with to ongoing cuts to the funding we receive and the increased demands placed on services due to a rapidly changing and growing population. It is schemes such as the regeneration, which generate sources of income for the Council which are not dependent upon our tax payers which will become increasingly critical in order to provide the level of service our local people deserve.

Sarah Lawman

Question

The present plans involve the destruction of too many old and valued trees that would ultimately increase the pollution in that area and therefore make the living quality of the proposed new residences very poor.

I would therefore like to ask the council why they cannot design a much smaller development of Elms Field around the existing old trees, thereby maintaining as much of the existing green space as possible

Answer

The proposals for Elms Field have been designed in line with the Masterplan Supplementary Planning Document and key design principles, including “placing the new Park at the heart of the scheme, retaining trees where possible” and “integrating high quality public realm with landscaping and tree planting”. In applying these principles, the design proposals have sought to utilise the most appropriate areas for development, whilst retaining the most significant and quality trees and providing a high quality green space.

A smaller scale development in this area would not provide the extent of benefits brought forward by the proposals, such as increased retail provision, improved public realm and improved quality of green space.

The Council recognises that the proposals for the redevelopment of Elms Field will result in the loss of existing trees on the site. The impact of the loss of these trees has been fully assessed through arboricultural method and impact statements. These impacts have been addressed through the design proposals, resulting in a high quality living environment for new residents.

Nick Percival

Question

Please can you tell us what contractual liabilities and contingent liabilities the council has committed to so far on the Elms Field development proposal?

Answer

In regards to the regeneration project the Council has committed to the following

a) Development Agreement between WBC and Wilson Bowden Developments Ltd and BDW Trading Ltd (t/a David Wilson Homes) dated July 2012 relating to the delivery of the Town Centre Regeneration Scheme including the Elms Field development proposals.

b) Conditional Pre-Let Agreement between WBC and Premier Inn Hotels Ltd dated April 2013 relating to the development and subsequent letting of a new 80 bedroom Hotel on a site fronting onto Denmark Street and Wellington Road forming part of the Elms Field development proposals.

c) Construction Contract between WBC and Dawnus Construction Ltd value £1.676m (start date July 2013) in respect of the refurbishment and reconstruction of the buildings on the corner of Market Place and Rose Street forming a key part of the Town Centre Regeneration Scheme linked to the Elms Field development proposals.

Christine Artus

Question

Retail patterns are changing rapidly. Recent studies have shown that internet shopping for food and drink is increasing year on year, and people are spending less time in supermarkets. It would add insult to injury to build a supermarket on Elms Field to be used to fulfil internet orders, with its attendant lorry and van arrivals and departures. The best access to the proposed supermarket is from the south where there are already Tesco and Lidl supermarkets. New residents living in Montague Park or North Wokingham have an easy drive to Bracknell and can park outside Safeway for food shopping. It would be better for Wokingham to have supermarkets in the new housing developments rather than on Elms Field

On what basis does the Council believe that having a supermarket on Elms Field will be good for the future of Wokingham and for its residents?

Answer

The Nathaniel Lichfield Study identifies the need for additional food retail floorspace to support the local growth set out in the Core Strategy.

The retail study takes into account the increased trend for internet shopping and has reduced the required capacity downwards accordingly and as such the amount of floorspace proposed is appropriate to meet resident’s needs.

At the moment there is no plan or expectation for the foodstore to become a hub for internet shopping but this would be for the foodstore, in discussion with the Council as landlord, to decide should they wish to take this approach.

The designs have been tested to ensure that delivery arrivals/departures can be successfully managed within the road networks based upon numbers above those which will actually occur.

It has been asked as to why we don’t locate the foodstore out of town.

The answer to this is that we know town and high streets up and down the country are in decline and one of the key reasons for this is the increase in out of town retail parks which has drawn footfall out of our towns.

So, if we truly want to regenerate our town, it is imperative that the foodstore be included within the town to bring footfall back into the town and help support other retailers

Provision of another foodstore on the edges of town would compound the issues and draw more people away from the town centre thus speeding up the current decline of our high street.

Ann Stainton

Question

Given that Elms Fields is precious to the townspeople, can WBC explain why they are flying in the face of predicted retail trends to build a supermarket which will draw custom away from the heart of the town?

I am reminded of Cllr David Lee’s closing remarks to the meeting held on 22nd October - “nothing is signed or sealed till we start ripping up our precious Elms Field”

Answer

Far from flying in the face of predicted retail trends our regeneration proposals respond directly to the large quantity of research on the future of the high street and look to address many of the problems which have led to the decline of town centres such as Wokingham. This includes things such as the decline in footfall due to the move of shops such as foodstores to out of town locations.

The Nathaniel Lichfield Study identifies the need for additional food retail floorspace to support the local growth set out in the Core Strategy.

The retail studies take into account the increased trend for internet shopping and have reduced the required capacity downwards accordingly and as such the amount of floorspace proposed is appropriate to meet resident’s needs.

The need for the additional foodstore is clearly established but the critical factor remains where it should be located.

Provision of another foodstore out of town would compound the issues and draw more people away from the town centre thus speeding up the current decline of our high street.

This is why our proposals place our new foodstore firmly in the heart of the town centre where it will help bring back the daily footfall required to help support a sustainable town.

Will Tyler

Question

Why should we wish to be like other towns, thereby losing our advantage and uniqueness, instead of retaining what is beautiful and historic in Wokingham?

Answer

We understand Wokingham is unique and we wish to strengthen its individuality.

One of the main reasons for the Council to step in and take over the regeneration of the town from private development companies was to ensure Wokingham could continue to offer something very different from neighbours such as Bracknell and Reading.

These types of large shopping destinations are not something Wokingham could, or even should, aspire to emulate as they do not reflect the community led, market town strength of Wokingham.

The designs for the regeneration have been specifically produced to ensure we can grow the Market offer, bring back more of the daily footfall and concentrate on increasing the smaller independent and niche retail experience that will set us apart and offer a real alternative to larger towns that meets our local resident’s needs.

Larissa Kirby

Question

Why are we losing more green space and trees, where are the children meant to run around that is free from dogs?

Answer

Whilst acknowledging that the proposals result in the loss of trees on the site and a reduction in the quantity of open space, the new park proposed at Elms Field will be of a very high quality and in particular will provide a better, safer and more attractive area for children to play.

The management arrangements for the new park, including any exclusion areas for dogs, have yet to be decided upon and will be confirmed during implementation of the scheme, and through discussions with the Town Council whom, it is proposed, take on management of the park on a long lease following completion

Jason Smith

Question

With so many local people strongly against the plans it is difficult to see why the councillors are forcing the development through regardless.

Do any of the councillors (or their companies) personally benefit from the development going through, monetary or otherwise, through any form of commission or payment from developers or land owners?

Answer

The primary driver for the Regeneration project remains the need to deliver the necessary infrastructure to support the significant level of local growth which will occur with the delivery of over 4,000 new homes to the edges of the town.

Failure to deliver this will accelerate the decline of the town centre which currently does not meet resident’s needs.

Although we know there are many who have concerns about the scheme we also know that there are many who support the proposals and would be just as concerned should the Council fail to deliver a sustainable future for Wokingham.

Those who stand to benefit from the regeneration are local residents who will reap the advantages of an improved town centre with the right facilities and infrastructure to meet their needs.

They will also benefit financially with the residual income generated by the scheme coming back to the Council to fund other schemes and services within the borough at no cost to the tax payer.

No Councillors, or their companies, stand to benefit financially from the scheme.

In line with the Council’s Constitution any such interests would need to be declared throughout the process.

David Leiper

Question

I understand that there are a number of key projects either in planning or approved that are required to provide capacity in our services and infrastructure to support the increase in population from the new housing to the North and South of the town;

The Multi Year Plan

The North relief road

The Southern relief road

Peach Place redevelopment

Aside from the Peach Place redevelopment, If the Elms Field development was rejected at planning and did not go ahead, which, if any of these projects would be affected and what would the impact be?

Answer

The Council’s Core Strategy and adopted Supplementary Planning Documents for North and South Wokingham and Wokingham Town Centre are based upon extensive public consultation and envision the development of the town which is currently in hand through the planning process. The decision to deliver these initiatives has been long established through policy and public participation.

Peach Place is an integral part of the package to regenerate the Town Centre, we’ve seen private sector regeneration schemes planned but these have failed because they weren’t viable.

To make it viable, the value of the development has to increase and the only way to do this is to have high rise development at Peach Place or include Elms Field.

The regeneration proposals for the town are to do with fulfilling a need for retail growth in the town centre. This additional retail forms part of the infrastructure supporting the wider area in the same manner as things such as the new roads.

The regeneration project does not directly impact upon the delivery of some infrastructure projects as these need to be provided regardless of whether change happens in the town centre.

The regeneration project will however indirectly impact on infrastructure delivery in that it will be making S106 contributions towards the delivery of other infrastructure within the borough and should it not occur this money will need to be found elsewhere.

However the real impact of the regeneration failing will be on the new and existing residents of Wokingham.

Should the town not deliver the necessary facilities to meet residents needs it will continue to decline, with greater leakage of footfall leading to a cycle of shops closing and leaving the town.

Should Wokingham cease to deliver a quality experience it is likely we will also lose our attractiveness as a location for business and investment which is critical to successfully support a Wokingham as a great place to live and even better place to do business.

Gerald de la Pascua

Question

The current plans to build on Elms Field, in order to fund the town centre redevelopment include a supermarket with under ground carpark, a 5 storey hotel, additional retail, and over 150 houses/flats. This is in addition to building 9 new retail units and some more housing on the Rose Street car park all of which should generate revenue. This is a vast development compared to the size of the town centre being redeveloped. Common sense suggests that the council is getting a really bad deal from the developers or that much more development than is required to fund the redevelopment of the town centre is taking place. Could somebody tell us which it is please?

Answer

Our plans are directly in line with the level of development and the requirements set out in planning policy such as the Core Strategy and Town Centre Masterplan SPD.

Yes it is a significant increase, but Wokingham has failed to grow over the past decade to reflect the changing area, and is also set to grow even more.

Our plans only deliver a proportion of the retail floorspace identified in the Nathanial Litchfield retail capacity study and required by a growing Wokingham. Even beyond our proposals there is still scope for further retail growth both within the town centre and the SDLs.

One of the key factors leading the Council to step in to deliver the regeneration project ourselves, as opposed to leaving it to the private sector as originally planned, was to deliberately prevent overdevelopment within the town centre.

Should we have continued with the original approach and simply sold off the site, allowing the private schemes to be delivered Wokingham would have been looking at much denser and much more intense development than our the current proposals.

As a reminder these are the original housing numbers put forward by the private schemes

The Peach Place private scheme proposed 142 residential units

Elms Field/Paddocks private schemes (three separate proposals) brought forward in the Key to the Gateway original ‘sell off’ approach included up to 300 homes.

That would have meant up to 442 new homes in the town centre. Our scheme delivers 157 homes across the same area as those above. That’s less than 50% of the smallest private proposal for the town.

Compared to such private schemes the Council regeneration also delivers a larger area of open space with much higher level of investment in facilities such as the play area and planting, more units suitable for independent and niche retailers, architecture which references directly back to Wokingham’s existing buildings rather than generic copy books, a much higher level of investment in new public spaces and the events area and a new community space to name just a few of the things we can deliver by placing as much value on social gain as financial gain.

Our approach to funding and managing the regeneration ourselves also allows us to reap the financial benefits of the development. We have been adamant the scheme must be self-funding and not rely on tax payer for funding, and in addition any residual income from the scheme will come directly back to the tax payer to fund other schemes and services for the community in the borough.

So far from getting a bad deal from a developer and being forced into development we are deliberately controlling this scheme to ensure it is the right solution for Wokingham and not the most profitable for the developer.